[Taxacom] phylogenomics in bacteria and archaea

J. Kirk Fitzhugh kfitzhugh at nhm.org
Fri Sep 11 19:22:06 CDT 2009

Quickly perusing the paper, it appears the author is suggesting 
something similar to what I discussed in a recent paper on the nature of 
species. I pointed out that for obligate asexual organisms, only 
phylogenetic hypotheses are appropriate, not specific:

Fitzhugh, K. 2009. Species as explanatory hypotheses: refinements and 
implications. Acta Biotheoretica 57: 201-248.

Jim Croft wrote:
> Thought the following was an interesting article.  Never really
> understood the notions of species and the nomenclature/taxonomy of
> these groups:
> http://bit.ly/zUlHk
> or
> http://www.microbemagazine.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=539:the-phylogenomic-species-concept-for-bacteria-and-archaea&catid=187:featured&Itemid=254
> Like most of the major biodiversity data aggregators, I tend to put
> these organisms in the 'too hard' basket...
> jim

J. Kirk Fitzhugh, Ph.D.
Curator of Polychaetes
Invertebrate Zoology Section
Research & Collections Branch
Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County
900 Exposition Blvd
Los Angeles CA 90007
Phone: 213-763-3233
FAX: 213-746-2999
e-mail: kfitzhug at nhm.org

More information about the Taxacom mailing list